---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John Haltiwanger <john.haltiwanger(a)gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 5:32 PM
Subject: Re: [LGRU] ¿Open design?
To: Aitor Méndez <aitor(a)e451.net>
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Aitor Méndez <aitor(a)e451.net> wrote:
> Thanks John, for your time and attention. I'm sorry I bothered you with
> the question "best".
>
No it was not a bother at all! I just wanted to expand the scope of best,
and continue interrogating it.
>
> I agree with you. In fact, the argument you hold is "the evidence" and
> what I propose is something that could be operating behind the scene and
> should be taken as another element to think the model. For this reason I
> use conditional words like "often" or "could hide."
>
> My intention is to show that the imperative of speed is (among other
> things) a condition of the competitive environment and deserves to be
> incorporated into the design approaches.
>
>
Certainly! And it is precisely this aspect of speed that hinders the
transition from interfaces: when you have a physical memory, a combination
of mouse movements and keyboard shortcuts, that quickly change the canvas
to more fit your imagination, it is difficult to transition to an
alternative approach which drags you all the way back to a turtle pace.
However, we have success stories here as well. For instance the vim text
editor is notorious for putting first time users back to the first time
they ever tried to use a word processor. Only more complicated ;)
But new vim users appear all the time, and it continues to grow more
popular. So there is also an aspect of the "reward" for the work. And, of
course, with vim you can move so fast that you will be frustrated to ever
have to use another editor.
Also, is there a reason to take our discussion offlist? or perhaps LGRU
would be interested in this next round of thoughts?